42 graves: place of forestry among sciences 



An opinion not unlike that held by Schiller before meeting 

 with the forester still commonly prevails in scientific circles in 

 this country. It is quite generally believed that foresters are 

 pure empiricists; something on the order of gardeners who plant 

 trees, of range-riders who fight forest fires, or lumbermen who 

 cruise timber, carry on logging operations or manufacture lumber 

 and other forest products; that for whatever little knowledge of 

 a scientific character the forester may need in his work, he de- 

 pends on experts in other branches of science; on the botanists 

 for the taxonomy of the trees, on physicists, chemists, and engi- 

 neers for the proper understanding of the physical, chemical, 

 and mechanical properties of the wood; on the geologist and soil 

 physicist for the knowledge of sites suitable for the growth of 

 different kinds of trees; upon the plant pathologist for the diseases 

 of trees; upon the entomologist for the insect enemies of the forest, 

 and so on. 



Such an impression is undoubtedly strengthened when the 

 activities of such an organization as the Forest Service are con- 

 sidered. The placing under management of about 165 million 

 acres of forest land has been an administrative problem of enor- 

 mous magnitude. The administration of this vast public property 

 involves many large industrial and economic questions, and affects 

 intimately a number of varied and important interests : the lumber 

 industry, the grazing industry, water power development, naviga- 

 tion, municipal water supplies, agricultural settlement, mining de- 

 velopment, and the railroads. In launching this great public 

 enterprise, undertaken in the face of strong opposition, adminis- 

 trative activities appeared to overshadow research work. In this 

 way doubtless many scientific men have gained the impression 

 that forestry has little to do with science, which seeks for the 

 causal relationship of things and for the establishment of laws 

 and principles; that forestry is rather a patch work of miscella- 

 neous knowledge borrowed from other sciences and assembled 

 without particular system to help the practical administrator of 

 forest property. 



My endeavor in this paper will be to show that this impression 

 is erroneous. While it is true that forestry as an art, as an applied 



